Free Traffic Legal Advice
Live cases legal advice => Private parking tickets => Topic started by: Keeper on May 19, 2024, 07:54:26 pm
-
Yes please. However, from experience, the SRA are only really interested in solicitors who commit fraud on large scale. You never know though!
-
I think I might do this - I am lucky to have had some legal experience in the past and have a vague understanding of the CPR but many in my situation could be easily intimidating and stressed out by these bullies.
If I do this, would you like me to keep thread updated?
-
QDR Solicitors' conduct, as described, appears to breach several key principles and rules set out by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA). Specifically, the issues with their behavior can be broken down as follows:
1. Misleading and Untruthful Statements:
- SRA Principles: Solicitors must act with integrity (Principle 2), not allow their independence to be compromised (Principle 3), and act in the best interests of each client (Principle 7).
- SRA Code of Conduct for Solicitors: Rule 1.4 requires solicitors not to mislead or attempt to mislead their clients, the court, or others. By suggesting they will ask the court to order legal costs that are not recoverable in the county court small claims track, they are potentially misleading you.
2. Threatening Behaviour:
- Professional Conduct: Solicitors must avoid actions that may be seen as bullying or intimidation. Making threats that are not legally supported can be considered as such.
- Unjustified Threats: The threat to claim legal costs beyond what is permissible in the county court small claims track can be seen as an attempt to intimidate you into paying the alleged debt without proper grounds.
3. Pre-Action Protocol Breach:
- Civil Procedure Rules (CPR): The Pre-Action Protocol (PAP) for debt claims requires that certain steps be taken before court action is initiated, including sending a Letter of Claim detailing the debt, providing 30 days for the debtor to respond, and seeking to resolve the matter without litigation.
- By not issuing a Letter of Claim and jumping straight to threatening court action, QDR Solicitors are in breach of the PAP, which aims to encourage early and informed settlement of disputes without the need for court proceedings.
4. Unfair Practices:
- Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPRs): Engaging in aggressive commercial practices, which include exerting undue pressure on a consumer to pay a disputed debt, is prohibited.
- Making false claims about recoverable legal costs could be considered a form of unfair commercial practice.
Specific Breaches
1. SRA Principles:
- Principle 1: Uphold the rule of law and the proper administration of justice. Misleading statements undermine the proper administration of justice.
- Principle 2: Act with integrity. Making false threats regarding legal costs does not demonstrate integrity.
- Principle 6: Behave in a way that maintains the trust the public places in you and in the provision of legal services. Misleading statements damage public trust in legal professionals.
2. SRA Code of Conduct:
- 1.4: You do not mislead or attempt to mislead your clients, the court, or others, either by your own acts or omissions or by allowing or being complicit in the acts or omissions of others (including your client).
- 8.5: You do not waste the court’s time. Initiating proceedings without proper grounds and in breach of the PAP wastes court resources.
Solicitors are considered officers of the court in England and Wales. As officers of the court, solicitors have a duty to uphold the rule of law and ensure the proper administration of justice. This role imposes several responsibilities on solicitors, including:
1. Duty of Honesty:
- Solicitors must act honestly and with integrity in all their professional dealings. They are required to be truthful in their communications with clients, the court, and other parties.
2. Duty to the Court:
- Solicitors must not mislead the court, whether by making false statements, failing to disclose relevant information, or allowing misleading evidence to be presented. They have a duty to act with candor and transparency in their dealings with the court.
3. Upholding the Law:
- As officers of the court, solicitors must uphold the law and ensure that their conduct is in accordance with legal and ethical standards. This includes adhering to the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) Principles and the Code of Conduct.
4. Avoiding Conflicts of Interest:
- Solicitors must manage conflicts of interest appropriately, ensuring that their duty to the court and the administration of justice is not compromised by their obligations to their clients.
5. Duty to the Administration of Justice:
- Solicitors must contribute to the fair and effective administration of justice. This includes not engaging in conduct that would bring the legal profession or the judicial process into disrepute.
In the context of the situation you described with QDR Solicitors, their role as officers of the court means that they have an obligation to avoid making misleading statements or threats. By threatening to seek legal costs in a manner that is not supported by the rules governing small claims proceedings, they are breaching their duty to the court and their ethical obligations.
-
QDR were acting as a debt collector. You will have been advised to completely ignore any debt collection notice as they will use language designed to get all the low-hanging fruit on the gullible tree to poop their pants and pay up.
If you're feeling particularly aggrieved and want to try and get some revenge, you could try and report QDR to the SRA. The conduct of solicitors is governed by strict professional and ethical standards and they should not use misleading or intimidating language.
Make a complaint to the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA). As QDR Solicitors have made threats that are not aligned with or breach legal procedures (such as implying that more than the fixed costs can be claimed in small claims court), this can be reported to the SRA.
The SRA can investigate if QDR's behaviour is deemed unprofessional or misleading. This won't be the first complaint they will have received about this firm of bottom-dwelling solicitors and failed legal wannabes.
-
QDR also said "we will ask the court to order that you pay our client's legal costs."
They can ask all they like but my understanding is that for small claims (which this would fall under), the court will not award costs, unless it is punitive.
-
Time for an update!
On 26th June I received a letter from QDR solicitors giving me a further 14 days to pay, after which they threatened that they'd begin court action.
Today I received an email back from UKPC complaints
Good afternoon,
Thank you for your email.
Please be advised we have reviewed your appeal and can confirm the charge has been cancelled.
Thank you for your understanding.
Kind Regards
Complaints Department
UK Parking Control
PO Box 1608
High Wycombe
HP12 9FN
Very happy with that result, many thanks all for your help
Good news. However, be aware that the right hand may not be aware of what the left hand is doing.
QDR were being mendacious by telling you that if you didn't pay within 14 days that they would begin court action. Firstly, they would have had to have been instructed by UKPC to act on their behalf and they would be required by the Pre Action Protocols (PAP) to have served you with at least 30 days notice to either pay before they could initiate court action. So, the QDR letter was nothing more than a debt collection letter which, as already advised, should be ignored.
Thankfully, UKPC have realised that they were obliged under the latest version of the CoP they had to either reissue the PCN and start the clock again or, as they have done in this case, cancel it. By cancelling it, they have saved themselves at least £35 in court fees that they usually end up paying by letting their PCNs get to Plan D.
-
Excellent result - they caved in even earlier than normal. Thanks for the update.
-
Time for an update!
On 26th June I received a letter from QDR solicitors giving me a further 14 days to pay, after which they threatened that they'd begin court action.
Today I received an email back from UKPC complaints
Good afternoon,
Thank you for your email.
Please be advised we have reviewed your appeal and can confirm the charge has been cancelled.
Thank you for your understanding.
Kind Regards
Complaints Department
UK Parking Control
PO Box 1608
High Wycombe
HP12 9FN
Very happy with that result, many thanks all for your help
-
PoC = Particulars of Claim. You meant CoP = Code of Practice.
You'll deal with PoC later if they don't re-issue the NtK.
-
My apologies, I thought I was supposed to first appeal and then complain - in any case I have now complained the that PoC hasn't been followed and said that if not resolved I will escalate to the BPA.
Will update when I hear back :)
Thanks again to all
-
Can you evidence that you were out of the country between the dates of the first NtK (plus 2 working days) and the 28th day after that? If so, you can complain (not appeal) to UKPC and request that they reissue the original NtK and restart the clock, thus allowing you to appeal. There is clause in the latest edition of the BPA CoP 23.8 that states they must reissue and restart the process if you can evidence that you (the addressee) could not have appealed within the original 28 day window. If you can and they don’t, a complaint to the BPA is in order.
You were advised to complain, not appeal about the reason you could not appeal within the required timeframe. I suggest you do that right now. Emphasise that it is NOT an appeal and emphasise that it IS a complaint.
Of course UKPC are not going accept that as an appeal. Before you can complain about this to the BPA, you have to exhaust the complaints procedure with UKPC.
In the meantime, just ignore any and all final reminders or debt collection letters. They are powerless to do anything and nothing will happen.
If the above complaint doesn’t get the PCN re-issued or a POPLA code, then it will end up as a court claim, either directly from UKPC or through DCB Legal. It matters not which. It is easily defended and is 99% sure to end up as a discontinuation.
-
This may well be so, but as regards the legal process the OP should be aware.
As regards possibilities and probabilities..OP some PPCs are more litigious than others and as with the stock market, past performance is not necessarily an accurate indicator of the future.
-
..you're off to court
With UKPC, more likely "off to receive a Claim Form only for them to discontinue at the last minute".
-
You can continue to correspond, but IMO they'll ignore your request and do not have a legal obligation to do otherwise.
They won't provide a POPLA code, and therefore..
..you're off to court if they wish unless you find another way to get the charge cancelled.
A court is not interested in the CoP, only the law, which is contract and PoFA.
IMO, your circumstances are not exceptional, if someone is away for such an extended period then they should make adequate arrangements to manage their mail.
-
So I received this a few days ago:
Dear NAME
Thank you for your recent correspondence in relation to parking charge reference XXXXXXX.
Unfortunately the opportunity to appeal this charge has expired and the charge has been referred to our debt recovery agent. To make payment, or request information, please contact ZZPS:
[ZZPS Address, telephone number, email]
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter,
Your sincerely,
[illegible signature]
Appeals Department,
UK Parking Control Ltd
I have drafted the following response - do you think best for me to send something along these lines or make a complaint straight away to BPA?
Cheers!
_________________________
Dear Sir/Madam,
I acknowledge receipt of your recent correspondence regarding the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) referenced above. I am writing to express my disappointment with your response and to formally reiterate my appeal based on the exceptional circumstances that prevented me from responding within the initial 28-day period and remind you of the regulations that you are bound by.
As previously stated, I was out of the country for the entirety of the appeal period, as evidenced by the attached flight tickets. According to Section 23.8 of the British Parking Association's (BPA) Code of Practice for Operators:
“You must have a process for considering appeals received outside of the normal 28-day period allowed for lodging an appeal where the appellant provides evidence of exceptional circumstances for the appeal not being lodged within the normal timeframes – where the addressee only discovers and can show that a parking charge notice has been issued in their name after the 28-day period, the period must restart and any enforcement, excluding court action, must be paused.”
I have provided clear evidence of my exceptional circumstances, and as per the BPA Code of Practice, you are required to restart the appeal period and pause any enforcement actions. Your recent response indicating that the opportunity to appeal has expired and the charge has been referred to a debt recovery agent is not compliant with these regulations.
I request that you reconsider my appeal in light of the BPA Code of Practice requirements. Failure to do so will leave me with no choice but to escalate this matter to the BPA and other relevant authorities for further investigation and resolution.
I look forward to your prompt response confirming the restart of the appeal period and the suspension of enforcement actions.
Yours faithfully,
-
https://www.ukparkingcontrol.com/complaintspolicy (https://www.ukparkingcontrol.com/complaintspolicy)
Their complaints policy may yield an email address...
-
Thanks so much - I will use your suggested edits. I'd have preferred to email it as an attachment but I can't find an email address online so I guess I will have to post it - how dull!
-
A slight edit suggestion. Are you intending to email this as a pdf attachment or directly as an email or posting it?
Customer Services Department
UK Parking Control Limited
The Apex
2 Sheriffs Orchard
Coventry
CV1 3PP
Subject: Appeal Against Parking Charge Notice [PCN Reference Number]
Dear Sir/Madam,
I am writing to formally appeal request that the the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) referenced above, which I received as the registered keeper of the vehicle in question, is reissued. Due to exceptional circumstances, I was unable to appeal within the initial 28-day period stipulated.
I was out of the country for the entirety of the 28-day appeal period, as evidenced by the attached flight tickets. According to the British Parking Association's (BPA) Code of Practice for Operators, specifically Section 23.8, operators are required to have a process for considering appeals received outside the normal 28-day period if the appellant can provide evidence of exceptional circumstances.
The relevant section of the BPA Code of Practice states:
“You must have a process for considering appeals received outside of the normal 28-day period allowed for lodging an appeal where the appellant provides evidence of exceptional circumstances for the appeal not being lodged within the normal timeframes – where the addressee only discovers and can show that a Parking Charge Notice has been issued in their name after the 28-day period, the period must restart and any enforcement, excluding court action, must be paused.”
Given that I was out of the country and only became aware of the PCN upon my return, I am requesting that the Notice to Keeper be re-issued and the appeal period be restarted in accordance with the BPA Code of Practice. I also request that any enforcement actions, excluding court action, be paused immediately.
I look forward to await your prompt response confirming the re-issue of the Parking Charge Notice and extension of the appeal period and the suspension of any enforcement action. If you require any further information or documentation, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.
Yours faithfully,
[Your Name]
-
Of course you should try and find out who the landowner or the management company they use to manage the estate. They are jointly and severally liable for the actions of their agents and they can easily ask the PPC to cancel the PCN. A complaint to the business you were a patron of asking them to intervene on your behalf with the estate management would be useful if only to let the management company and the business how these unregulated private parking companies are damaging their business.
Can you evidence that you were out of the country between the dates of the first NtK (plus 2 working days) and the 28th day after that? If so, you can complain (not appeal) to UKPC and request that they reissue the original NtK and restart the clock, thus allowing you to appeal. There is clause in the latest edition of the BPA CoP 23.8 that states they must reissue and restart the process if you can evidence that you (the addressee) could not have appealed within the original 28 day window. If you can and they don’t, a complaint to the BPA is in order.
I have flight bookings / passport stamps.
Then I've already told you what to do.
Thanks so much
I will continue to pursue Plan A and in the meantime I (or rather, chat GPT) have drafted the following message to UKPC.
Customer Services Department
UK Parking Control Limited
The Apex
2 Sheriffs Orchard
Coventry
CV1 3PP
Subject: Appeal Against Parking Charge Notice [PCN Reference Number]
Dear Sir/Madam,
I am writing to formally appeal the Parking Charge Notice (PCN) referenced above, which I received as the registered keeper of the vehicle in question. Due to exceptional circumstances, I was unable to appeal within the initial 28-day period stipulated.
I was out of the country for the entirety of the 28-day appeal period, as evidenced by the attached flight tickets. According to the British Parking Association's (BPA) Code of Practice for Operators, specifically Section 23.8, operators are required to have a process for considering appeals received outside the normal 28-day period if the appellant can provide evidence of exceptional circumstances.
The relevant section of the BPA Code of Practice states:
“You must have a process for considering appeals received outside of the normal 28-day period allowed for lodging an appeal where the appellant provides evidence of exceptional circumstances for the appeal not being lodged within the normal timeframes – where the addressee only discovers and can show that a parking charge notice has been issued in their name after the 28-day period, the period must restart and any enforcement, excluding court action, must be paused.”
Given that I was out of the country and only became aware of the PCN upon my return, I am requesting that the appeal period be restarted in accordance with the BPA Code of Practice. I also request that any enforcement actions, excluding court action, be paused immediately.
I look forward to your prompt response confirming the extension of the appeal period and the suspension of enforcement actions. If you require any further information or documentation, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.
Yours faithfully,
[Your Name]
Attachments:
Copies of flight tickets confirming my absence from the country during the appeal period
Assuming that no one points out any glaring errors with this I will send it off tomorrow and then report back
Thanks once again!
-
Of course you should try and find out who the landowner or the management company they use to manage the estate. They are jointly and severally liable for the actions of their agents and they can easily ask the PPC to cancel the PCN. A complaint to the business you were a patron of asking them to intervene on your behalf with the estate management would be useful if only to let the management company and the business how these unregulated private parking companies are damaging their business.
Can you evidence that you were out of the country between the dates of the first NtK (plus 2 working days) and the 28th day after that? If so, you can complain (not appeal) to UKPC and request that they reissue the original NtK and restart the clock, thus allowing you to appeal. There is clause in the latest edition of the BPA CoP 23.8 that states they must reissue and restart the process if you can evidence that you (the addressee) could not have appealed within the original 28 day window. If you can and they don’t, a complaint to the BPA is in order.
I have flight bookings / passport stamps.
Then I've already told you what to do.
-
There are a couple of things you should be doing for now. Plan A is always the easiest to get these cancelled is to get the landowner to tell their agent to cancel it. You can continue with Plan A right up until the commencement of Plan D.
What did the business you were visiting at the time have to say about their patrons being invoiced for £100 for the privilege?
Appreciate the advice! The business that the driver was visiting at the time has since said that there's little that they can do as the parking is managed by the owners of the estate, not the climbing centre itself which is the business that the driver was a patron of. They did say however that they are away of other patrons successfully arguing that the signage was inadequate. Do you think it's worth me trying to get in touch with the owner of the estate / management company?
What was the date the original NtK was issued? Was it 27th March or earlier?
Issued on 28th March for an alleged offence that occurred on 26th.
Can you evidence that you were out of the country between the dates of the first NtK (plus 2 working days) and the 28th day after that? If so, you can complain (not appeal) to UKPC and request that they reissue the original NtK and restart the clock, thus allowing you to appeal. There is clause in the latest edition of the BPA CoP 23.8 that states they must reissue and restart the process if you can evidence that you (the addressee) could not have appealed within the original 28 day window. If you can and they don’t, a complaint to the BPA is in order.
Yes, I can. I have flight bookings / passport stamps.
Apart from the above, all you can do for now is continue with Plan A and wait or the ridiculous but useless debt collector letters. If, or more likely when, you receive a real Letter of Claim, either directly from UKPC themselves or DCB Legal (not anything from DCB Ltd), then come back for advice on how to proceed.
A claim is the start of Plan D and is easily dealt with and will end up with an eventual discontinuation.
Thanks for the info above. So far I haven't seen anything in the mail, will check again on Monday.
Thanks.
To what breach do these examples refer e.g. parking for longer than permitted or simply parking in a manner where an instant breach occurs, for example not in a bay or without displaying a permit?
And does this argument always win or only sometimes. I would certainly appreciate any judgments on this point.
OP, pl answer the question about what the driver did e.g. park up as a patron or simply park and disappear off site etc.
Thanks, see response above. The driver parked up and indeed paid for onsite services (climbing centre) before departing.
-
When I have enough spare time, I will go back through my records and try to find the relevant information. However, you will appreciate that county court judgments orders do not specify the judges reasoning. Only if either the claimant or defendant wishes to pay a small fortune for the transcript, there is none. The cases that involved court decisions on "period of parking" are buried deep within the MSE forum and I'm sure you are well aware that their search engine is woeful.
PoFA only mentions "period of parking". A "period" can only be from a fixed time, to a fixed time. Otherwise it is simply a "time of parking" PoFA does not say "time of parking".
-
Thanks.
To what breach do these examples refer e.g. parking for longer than permitted or simply parking in a manner where an instant breach occurs, for example not in a bay or without displaying a permit?
And does this argument always win or only sometimes. I would certainly appreciate any judgments on this point.
OP, pl answer the question about what the driver did e.g. park up as a patron or simply park and disappear off site etc.
-
@b789, why do you think the term 'period of parking' cannot be construed as a moment in time when the nature of the contravention does not require proof of the breach to be anything other than the vehicle was in situ. From the PPC's perspective 1 second is the same as 30 minutes, but from the keeper's perspective a consideration period would apply.
The “period of parking” argument has been won at POPLA and at court several times. Unfortunately, I don’t have those POPLA appeals to hand at the moment.
Whilst not yet enacted, the incoming statutory Code of Practice defines "2.24 parking period" as:
"the length of time that a vehicle has been parked, i.e. left stationary otherwise than in the course of driving, after any relevant consideration period has expired (excluding instances where the driver has stopped to enable passengers to leave or enter the vehicle). This is not the period between a vehicle being recorded as entering and departing controlled land."
The following has been used successfully in the past:
“POFA paragraph 9(2)(a) says that a NTK must specify 'the period of parking to which the notice relates' The operator's purported NTK does not specify the period of parking to which the NTK relates as a period has a start and an end and the operator's purported NTK specifies only a single point in time. This failure alone renders the charge unenforceable against the keeper.”
The above, believe it or not, was for an IAS appeal and the following definition is what won it:
“Paragraph 16.1 of the IPC's Code of Practice says 'Where a Parking Charge is issued Notices must comply with the applicable requirements as set out in Schedule 3'. Schedule 3 echoes the POFA requirement for a period of parking to be specified in the NTK and refers to an example NTK in Appendix 5 where the following form of words is prescribed:
Period of Parking:
From: (Date and Time of entry)
To: (Date and Time of Exit)”
When I have time, I will try and find more cases. However, “period of parking” is a valid argument if presented properly as it is one more point to use in any appeal or defence to show non-compliance with the requirements of PoFA. Hence, the OP should not throw away the no keeper liability option as an appeal or defence argument by revealing the identity of the driver.
-
@b789, why do you think the term 'period of parking' cannot be construed as a moment in time when the nature of the contravention does not require proof of the breach to be anything other than the vehicle was in situ. From the PPC's perspective 1 second is the same as 30 minutes, but from the keeper's perspective a consideration period would apply.
And for the OP, what was the driver up to on the site? Your account does not state that the driver was actually a patron of any business on the site...'the area where the notice has been served for is outside the climbing centre but formerly okay to park there during certain hours.'
Before we possibly go off in the wrong direction, let's clarify key issues pl.
-
There are a couple of things you should be doing for now. Plan A is always the easiest to get these cancelled is to get the landowner to tell their agent to cancel it. You can continue with Plan A right up until the commencement of Plan D.
What did the business you were visiting at the time have to say about their patrons being invoiced for £100 for the privilege?
What was the date the original NtK was issued? Was it 27th March or earlier?
Can you evidence that you were out of the country between the dates of the first NtK (plus 2 working days) and the 28th day after that? If so, you can complain (not appeal) to UKPC and request that they reissue the original NtK and restart the clock, thus allowing you to appeal. There is clause in the latest edition of the BPA CoP 23.8 that states they must reissue and restart the process if you can evidence that you (the addressee) could not have appealed within the original 28 day window. If you can and they don’t, a complaint to the BPA is in order.
Apart from the above, all you can do for now is continue with Plan A and wait or the ridiculous but useless debt collector letters. If, or more likely when, you receive a real Letter of Claim, either directly from UKPC themselves or DCB Legal (not anything from DCB Ltd), then come back for advice on how to proceed.
A claim is the start of Plan D and is easily dealt with and will end up with an eventual discontinuation.
-
A Quick Look at the NtK shows PoFA failure to specify any “period of parking” in breach of 9(2)(a) and (c ). Also, the time stamp in the photo on the NtK appears to have been cropped which is a failure of BPA CoP 21.5a.
Many thanks for checking. Does this mean that your voice echoes the advice above to do nothing? Or should I send something to UKPC saying highlighting non-compliance with PoFA?
-
A Quick Look at the NtK shows PoFA failure to specify any “period of parking” in breach of 9(2)(a) and (c ). Also, the time stamp in the photo on the NtK appears to have been cropped which is a failure of BPA CoP 21.5a.
-
One point that may come in useful if/when this progresses to a claim, which is highly likely but will not result in anything other than a discontinuation before a hearing if you follow all the advice. You say the driver visited the location on 26th March and it was a location they had visited previously but had no or different restrictions back then. Was the previous visit more or less than 4 months previously?
If the last previous visit was less than 4 months previously, were there any prominent signs indicating that the terms of parking had been changed? If so, they have breached their own ATA, the BPA, Code of Practice rule 19.10 which states:
Material change - notices
Where there is any material change to any pre-existing terms and conditions that would not be immediately apparent to a motorist entering controlled land that is or has been open for public parking, you must place additional (temporary) notices at the site entrance for a period of not less than 4 months from the date of the change making it clear that new terms and conditions/charges apply, such that regular visitors who might be familiar with the old terms do not inadvertently incur parking charges.
Whilst some may advocate trying to appeal to the better nature of the customer service ethos of UKPC and try and mitigate the circumstance so that they reset the clock and let you appeal, it is just going to be a waste of time and effort. There are some rules in the CoP that could be argued that they should re-issue the PCN and start the clock but, to be honest, they won’t.
Whilst we haven’t yet seen both sides of the NtK (suitably redacted but with all dates showing) there is likely to be another flaw or two in it that will force them to make the claim under PoFA against the keeper. However, there is now an updated item to add to any robust defence to request that the claim is dismissed at the allocation stage as they will be in breach of several CPRs and PoFA. We will cross that bridge if and when we need to. For now, the keeper must not reveal the identity of the driver.
1. Honestly not sure when signage changed - driver's last visit was probably in the last 4 months but the driver may have used their small private car park owned by the climbing centre - the area where the notice has been served for is outside the climbing centre but formerly okay to park there during certain hours. I will call the climbing centre to find out when rules changed...
2. Full NTK with both sides attached to original post
3. I hear you on an appeal - thanks for this info!
-
One point that may come in useful if/when this progresses to a claim, which is highly likely but will not result in anything other than a discontinuation before a hearing if you follow all the advice. You say the driver visited the location on 26th March and it was a location they had visited previously but had no or different restrictions back then. Was the previous visit more or less than 4 months previously?
If the last previous visit was less than 4 months previously, were there any prominent signs indicating that the terms of parking had been changed? If so, they have breached their own ATA, the BPA, Code of Practice rule 19.10 which states:
Material change - notices
Where there is any material change to any pre-existing terms and conditions that would not be immediately apparent to a motorist entering controlled land that is or has been open for public parking, you must place additional (temporary) notices at the site entrance for a period of not less than 4 months from the date of the change making it clear that new terms and conditions/charges apply, such that regular visitors who might be familiar with the old terms do not inadvertently incur parking charges.
Whilst some may advocate trying to appeal to the better nature of the customer service ethos of UKPC and try and mitigate the circumstance so that they reset the clock and let you appeal, it is just going to be a waste of time and effort. There are some rules in the CoP that could be argued that they should re-issue the PCN and start the clock but, to be honest, they won’t.
Whilst we haven’t yet seen both sides of the NtK (suitably redacted but with all dates showing) there is likely to be another flaw or two in it that will force them to make the claim under PoFA against the keeper. However, there is now an updated item to add to any robust defence to request that the claim is dismissed at the allocation stage as they will be in breach of several CPRs and PoFA. We will cross that bridge if and when we need to. For now, the keeper must not reveal the identity of the driver.
-
First things first, I'm very sorry to hear about your father, I hope all is well.
Before we move onto the facts of the parking incident itself, some process. The fact you were abroad for the times stated is unlikely to have much bearing on the case, other than the fact you are now beyond UKPC's arbitrary appeal window - this means they won't consider any appeals, nor provide a POPLA code, but this is not the end of the world. Ignore the debt collectors, you should not engage with them at all. File but ignore their letters. You need to keep an eye out for anything that is marked as a 'Letter Before Claim' or similar, which will come from UKPC's solicitors/legal firm. UKPC do tend to issue a lot of claims - another thing they (or more accurately their chosen law firm DCB Legal) tend to do, if the matter is defended, is discontinue the claims before they ever reach a courtroom. This thread from the MSE Forum makes for interesting reading: DCB LEGAL RECORD OF PRIVATE PARKING COURT CLAIM DISCONTINUATIONS (https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6377263/dcb-legal-record-of-private-parking-court-claim-discontinuations). Usual caveat that past performance is not always a reliable indicator of future conduct, but you'll see there's been a definite pattern.
Now, onto the incident. You mention that it is your mother's vehicle, but that you are the registered keeper?
Car Park Signage
I have attached photos of the car park signage. I'm not sure exactly which bay the driver parked in but you can see from the signs that they may not be within visibility or regulatory regulations (you will know better than me!). There's one more sign I can try and add a photo of for location, it was on a gate that was open so that it wasn't really visible (it's the actual notice in the last photo).
That signage looks shoddy for a number of reasons - is there a sign at the entrance? The £100 charge isn't particularly prominent for a start, such a charge should be clearly brought to the motorists attention. The placement also looks poor, the signage should be 'there to be seen' - this is compounded if there is no sign at the entrance. There's also a potential argument that the signage is forbidding, as it doesn't make an offer to those without a permit to park on certain terms.
Many thanks, my father is now well and returned to the UK yesterday - he got very lucky with early treatment. Appreciate it!
In response:
1. Apologies, my poor punctuation. Previous incident, resolved years ago by helpful members of another forum, was my mother's car. I didn't know about this place at the time! This case relates to my vehicle.
2. Here (https://maps.app.goo.gl/z8QLN3VTDdWSunPZ8) is a street view of the space. You'll see the sign by White Spider on the left, since the driver was last there and since the street view car went around, the days and times have been taped over, so indeed one without a permit is simply forbidden to park in those spaces immediately past the grey gate at any time, under any terms. The sign you can read in my photos is the one (presumably updated since street view) on the left hand gate.
3. Really interesting info, thanks. Typically would a claim be for the amount on the charge plus some sort of admin fee? Seeing as if I were to want to pay now, it would be £170, bearing in mind that it's not possible to claim costs in the small claims court, it would seem I have nothing to lose, as long as I don't miss the initial pre-claim correspondence.
4. Understood on not corresponding with debt collection agency. Is there any sense in writing to UKPC explaining that I was out of the country and that I wish to contest the charge? Whilst I understand the answer is probably no, my question is more if this may help me in the future if I have taken this step.
Many thanks again
-
First things first, I'm very sorry to hear about your father, I hope all is well.
Before we move onto the facts of the parking incident itself, some process. The fact you were abroad for the times stated is unlikely to have much bearing on the case, other than the fact you are now beyond UKPC's arbitrary appeal window - this means they won't consider any appeals, nor provide a POPLA code, but this is not the end of the world. Ignore the debt collectors, you should not engage with them at all. File but ignore their letters. You need to keep an eye out for anything that is marked as a 'Letter Before Claim' or similar, which will come from UKPC's solicitors/legal firm. UKPC do tend to issue a lot of claims - another thing they (or more accurately their chosen law firm DCB Legal) tend to do, if the matter is defended, is discontinue the claims before they ever reach a courtroom. This thread from the MSE Forum makes for interesting reading: DCB LEGAL RECORD OF PRIVATE PARKING COURT CLAIM DISCONTINUATIONS (https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6377263/dcb-legal-record-of-private-parking-court-claim-discontinuations). Usual caveat that past performance is not always a reliable indicator of future conduct, but you'll see there's been a definite pattern.
Now, onto the incident. You mention that it is your mother's vehicle, but that you are the registered keeper?
Car Park Signage
I have attached photos of the car park signage. I'm not sure exactly which bay the driver parked in but you can see from the signs that they may not be within visibility or regulatory regulations (you will know better than me!). There's one more sign I can try and add a photo of for location, it was on a gate that was open so that it wasn't really visible (it's the actual notice in the last photo).
That signage looks shoddy for a number of reasons - is there a sign at the entrance? The £100 charge isn't particularly prominent for a start, such a charge should be clearly brought to the motorists attention. The placement also looks poor, the signage should be 'there to be seen' - this is compounded if there is no sign at the entrance. There's also a potential argument that the signage is forbidding, as it doesn't make an offer to those without a permit to park on certain terms.
-
Hi all,
After returning from overseas to find a stash of letters and feeling rather cheesed off so thought I'd turn to the gurus on here after I was so wonderfully helped by the lovely people from Pepipoo, to get my mother's vehicle out of a Heathrow parking charge.
Explanation / Context
NOTE: I've tried to keep it brief but I'm also unsure what may or may not be relevant, so thought it best to stick all the facts in!
I am the keeper. The driver went to this location on 26th March, somewhere they had been to before and parked where they have always parked in the past (it's next to a climbing centre). N.B. The restrictions are clearly new as the climbing centre had a sign stating when it was safe to park and I can see the sign has been modified with some tape to reflect the changes.
The driver parked there and then left later that evening.
I went overseas on the morning of the 29th of March (provable) and did not return until the 2nd of May. Not sure if relevant but I was going to return on the 18th of April but had to stay longer as my father suddenly became unwell while overseas and needed cardiac procedures to be carried out.
I returned to the following notices somewhere in a mountain of mail (attached in a pdf)
28th March: UKPC NTK Parked in a permit area
11th April: UKPC NTK Final Reminder
24th April: Debt Collection Agency Letter
10 May: Debt Collection Agency letter
Car Park Signage
I have attached photos of the car park signage. I'm not sure exactly which bay the driver parked in but you can see from the signs that they may not be within visibility or regulatory regulations (you will know better than me!). There's one more sign I can try and add a photo of for location, it was on a gate that was open so that it wasn't really visible (it's the actual notice in the last photo).
At this point I, the keeper, have made no contact with either UKPC or the Debt Collection Agency - I thought this was best until I heard from you guys. What should I do next?
Cheers!
[attachment deleted by admin]